Evan A. Feigenbaum
{
"authors": [
"Evan A. Feigenbaum"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Why America No Longer Gets Asia
The United States is failing to adapt to the drama of economic and institutional change in Asia. America risks missing opportunities in every part of the region—East, Central, and South—while being out-competed in both geopolitics and business.
Source: Parlio
Asia is changing dramatically but the United States is losing the plot. The region is being stitched back together in ways that could make the United States less relevant in each of Asia’s constituent parts. Asians are, in various ways, passing America by.
Recent articles in the Financial Times, New York Times, and other major media have delved into China’s grand new plan to reconnect Asia with a network of massive infrastructure projects. This so-called “One Belt, One Road” effort, launched to great fanfare by President Xi Jinping in 2013, evokes the ancient Silk Road that stretched from Asia to Europe and saw goods, people, and technology move across continental caravan routes and well-trafficked sea lanes. The "Belt and Road" is Xi’s signature foreign policy initiative and may soon include billions in new Chinese spending. On paper, at least, it is a classic example of economic statecraft, envisioning a series of China-sponsored rails, roads, pipelines, ports, and power stations spanning Asia, from Indonesia to Turkmenistan and beyond.
Some argue that this Chinese initiative aims to construct a Sinocentric Asia and dislodge the United States. But in fact, the competitive challenge America now faces in Asia is bigger, broader, and has deeper roots.Put bluntly, Asia is being reconnected, strategically and economically. Ultimately, the region could, in important ways, more closely resemble the historical norm that prevailed for centuries prior to America’s arrival.
This change reflects trends that date back decades and is a function of the choices, actions, and capabilities of many Asian states — not just China but also Japan, India, and South Korea, among others.
Asians are, in various ways, passing America by.
The United States is badly prepared for this momentous rebirth, which is at once stitching Asia back together and making the United States less relevant in each of Asia’s constituent parts.
The question is not just whether or to what extent the United States is or isn't “pivoting” to Asia, as U.S. officials have put it. More broadly, the question is whether the United States, to compete in both geopolitics and business, appreciates the dramatic ways in which Asia is changing.
In this essay in The Washington Quarterly, written two years before Xi proposed the "Belt and Road" but, I fear, still all too relevant, I explored “Why America No Longer Gets Asia” and how the United States can adapt to these new challenges.
A follow up essay in Foreign Affairs several months ago pulled these threads some more in light of the U.S.-backed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the China-backed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
About the Author
Vice President for Studies
Evan A. Feigenbaum is vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he oversees work at its offices in Washington, New Delhi, and Singapore on a dynamic region encompassing both East Asia and South Asia. He served twice as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and advised two Secretaries of State and a former Treasury Secretary on Asia.
- Beijing Doesn’t Think Like Washington—and the Iran Conflict Shows WhyCommentary
- The Trump-Modi Trade Deal Won’t Magically Restore U.S.-India TrustCommentary
Evan A. Feigenbaum
Recent Work
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie India
- India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?Commentary
On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.
Konark Bhandari
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions SimmerCommentary
On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.
Tejas Bharadwaj
- TRUST and TariffsCommentary
The India-U.S. relationship currently appears buffeted between three “Ts”—TRUST, Tariffs, and Trump.
Arun K. Singh
- Indian Airstrikes in Pakistan: May 7, 2025Commentary
On May 7, 2025, between 1:05 and 1:30 a.m. (IST), airstrikes carried out by the Indian Air Force hit nine locations inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). It was codenamed Operation Sindoor.
Rudra Chaudhuri